Evaluates LLMs' ability to identify precise textual spans expressing emotion within single-sentence and multi-sentence contexts, distinguishing emotion evidence from other linguistic elements. Use when the user wants to benchmark on SEER, or asks about evaluating this task. Reports F1.
Scanned 9/11/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add qhjqhj00/research-skills-pool --skill seer-eval --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Seer Eval?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/qhjqhj00-seer-eval)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
name: seer-eval
description: Evaluates LLMs' ability to identify precise textual spans expressing emotion within single-sentence and multi-sentence contexts, distinguishing emotion evidence from other linguistic elements. Use when the user wants to benchmark on SEER, or asks about evaluating this task. Reports F1.
metadata:
skill_kind: dataset_eval
source_arxiv: 2510.03490
bibtex_key: sampath2025seer
confidence: high
---
# seer-eval
> SEER: The Span-based Emotion Evidence Retrieval Benchmark — Sampath et al. (2025) (arXiv:2510.03490, 2025)
## What this evaluates
Evaluates LLMs' ability to identify precise textual spans expressing emotion within single-sentence and multi-sentence contexts, distinguishing emotion evidence from other linguistic elements.
## Datasets
- **SEER** — total 1200; splits: test (-1); repo https://github.com/chailab-umich/SEER
## Metrics
- `F1` **(primary)** — range: [0, 1]
- Span-level F1 score computed over retrieved or highlighted emotion evidence spans. Exact match is required for highlighting; hallucinations score 0.
- `Cosine Similarity (Sim)` — range: [0, 1]
- Cosine similarity between the embedding of the predicted span and the gold span.
## Input / output format
**Input**: Single-sentence or multi-sentence text passages containing potential emotion evidence.
**Output**: Retrieved span text or highlighted text with verbatim markup indicating the emotion evidence.
## Scoring recipe
```python
def evaluate(predictions, golds):
f1s, sims = [], []
for pred, gold in zip(predictions, golds):
f1s.append(compute_span_f1(pred, gold))
sims.append(cosine_similarity(embed(pred), embed(gold)))
return mean(f1s), mean(sims)
```
## Common pitfalls
- CoT prompting degrades performance on single-sentence tasks but improves it on multi-sentence tasks.
- Highlight prompt is significantly harder than Retrieve due to strict verbatim requirements; any hallucination yields a score of 0.
- Model size does not directly predict performance; smaller models can outperform much larger ones.
## Evidence (verbatim from paper)
> Table 3: F1 and cosine similarity (Sim) scores for Task 1 (Retrieve and Highlight). Each entry is averaged over five runs with standard deviations.
## Citation
```bibtex
@misc{sampath2025seer,
title={SEER: The Span-based Emotion Evidence Retrieval Benchmark},
author={Sampath et al. (2025)},
year={2025},
note={arXiv:2510.03490}
}
```
- arXiv: 2510.03490
Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.
No comments yet. Be the first to comment!